I'm not even going to debate with you, as looking at your comment history, it's obvious you're a flaming liberal-progressive type. Accusing *me* of being a "wingnut"?? Hah! That's rich!
A majority of the US rejects the liberal-progressive agenda. That's why liberals seeking office have tried to re-brand themselves as "progressives" as that's a warmer, fuzzier label that doesn't recall the failure of nearly every liberal policy ever tried. Liberalism is a failed belief-set. It can never win in an open market and discussion of ideas. That's why liberals-progressives always seek to silence opposition and debate. It's the reason behind the Fairness Doctrine and new backdoor plans being pushed currently to accomplish the same thing.
It's also the reason that liberals have tried to send in their "brown-shirts" in the form of the unions and special-interest group bussed-in disruptors to the town-hall meetings. They hear the American people and it scares them to death, so they attempt what liberals always attempt when confronted with opposition...they try to silence it/drown it out.
White SEIU thugs even engaged in the assault and battery of an African-American outside of a town-hall meeting for his political beliefs! Where are the liberals with the charges of "racism", hmm? I guess it's ok when liberals and their friends do it, as long as the target had the "wrong" views. Nice multi-culturalism there.
Double-standard, much?
Liberalism always results in unintended consequences. Welfare expanded the number of poor. Right now, farmers in California are having their crops die to protect a bait-fish, which will increase food prices across the country thus causing poor people and their children to be less well-nourished. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are all broke and consuming the majority of this nations' GDP.
Liberalism is nothing more than a front for socialism/communism/fascism. It will never succeed in gaining and maintaining power in the US. The people of the US reject it and its' policies and ideology.
You can rail and scream and toss insults all you want. You can attempt to silence opposition all you want. Liberalism will never ever succeed in gaining and maintaining power in the US.
Just as the American people are rejecting this "Obamacare" reform and are about to storm Washington on 9/12 to reject the other liberal policies, they will always reject liberalism.
The American people have been asleep for a long time, but the liberal crazies in Washington have gone too far and have awakened the juggernaut. What has occurred so far in the town-halls and Tea Parties is only the beginning. People who have been too busy living their lives to pay attention have found it necessary to take action, and they're really, *really* pissed that the liberal nut-jobs have made it necessary for them to have to set things right.
Those politicians who fail to heed the will of the American people will find themselves in need of a new career come election time. This goes for those of both major parties. Republicans lost their conservative roots a long time ago and are now almost as liberal as the opposition. This was proven by GWB's lack of action on the borders & immigration, and the new entitlements and the bailouts.
Get ready for all your favorite liberal politicians to be sent packing on election day.
Now go away, before I taunt you with your failures again!
What we should really have is to get rid of the need for so much tax money to conduct the business of government.
People need to stop falling for politicians who bribe them with their own money.
Oh, if only that would happen! That is exactly spot-on.
But as long as we allow the government to seize so much wealth, politicians will continue to use this method to increase the governments' power, and citizens will fall for it if for no other reason than in desperation to try to get enough of their wealth back from the government that seized it to begin with to survive.
It's gotten so bad, the federal government doesn't even pretend that they don't do this intentionally to expand their power. Just look at how the federal government uses the threat of cutting off states from needed returns of tax money the feds have seized from the states to exert control over the states in matters that the Constitution says are to be decided by each state and the people therein.
There needs to be a revolt that throws out every incumbent politician until they finally get the message that we refuse to elect anyone that does not seek to drastically reduce the wealth the government seizes, by threat of force, from its' own citizens and begins to interpret & uphold the Constitution at face value again.
I have an awful feeling that it would take going quite far down the "four boxes in defense of Liberty", though. Then again, the way things are going, it will come to that anyway if the people truly tried to throw out the scoundrels. I'm pretty certain that if the government believed that the people were truly intent on seriously reducing its' power, there would be some sort of "emergency" declared, with marshal law and suspended elections.
It's a horrifying and likely very bloody prospect. However, waiting will just make the cost higher.
"It's the culmination of the Reaganomics era, where everyone "learned" that the almighty dollar was the only thing that mattered, and you get your bonuses based on quarterly performance, not on long-term performance."
Sure. Because before bad old Reagan entered the office, everybody only got bonuses after 10 SOLID YEARS of performance... and dollars didn't matter so nobody cared. No, the economic miracle of the United States, which began over a hundred years before Reagan was a gleam in his father's eye somehow managed to make it all the way to 1980 before people began thinking that dollars are "almighty" and that bonuses should be made in accordance with recent activity.
Yep. Makes sense me! (Even if it doesn't)
-Ben
Ben old horse, what you need to realize is that many people who tend to have a more "left" political belief-set tend to suffer from RDS (Reagan Derangement Syndrome), usually as a lesser symptom in conjunction with BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome). These poor people are incapable of rational thought whenever Bush, or to a lesser extent (now), Reagan, enter into the conversation.
It's curious to note however, although Carter had all but destroyed this country from both a national defense/foreign policy standpoint as well as an economic standpoint, you never heard Reagan blaming his/the nations' problems on Carter, especially after the first 3-4months in office. He was more about encouraging the nation and the people to look to the future, not seeking to blame the past. This stands in stark contrast to Clinton & Obama.
Just don't expect anyone with leftist political views to be willing or capable of discussing either Reagan or GWB rationally.
Now, as to this proposed redefining by the FCC of the term "broadband", it's an obvious underhanded move by the telcos/ISPs to rake in more money for lesser service and should be nipped in the bud. If anything, the standards should be greatly increased as technology has advanced along with the other nations of the world and the needs of the nation and the citizens has increased to match.
If the US is to have a hope of remaining competitive in this new "Information Economy" that recent administrations...both (R) and (D)...have been so enthusiastic for, then the US *must* have a competitive network infrastructure.
Personally, I think it's a major mistake for the US to abandon nearly all its' manufacturing base. Look to China, Russia, and India to be the new superpowers on the world stage in the next few decades if this trend continues, with the US relegated to Second-World Nation status, much as India has enjoyed the last 50 years.
If the US is going to switch to this "Information Economy" model and abandon manufacturing, then it had better get its' network infrastructure in shape to compete and not seek to "dumb-down" our network infrastructure, as other countries are far, far ahead.
High proof rubbing or cleaning alcohol sold in American drug stores won't work because there is a deliberate retardant added to spoil its value as an explosive. Perhaps a good thing, but if you need to make one of these weapons you should use some old fashioned moonshine or something home-made.
Easy solution: "Klean-Strip S-L-X Denatured Alcohol" widely available at home improvement and paint supply stores in pints and gallons. I use it as a shellac thinner when finishing the tweed covering on vintage-style guitar amplifiers I build.
As for black powder, I used to make the stuff based on a recipe from the World Book Encyclopedia. The Salt Pieter I purchased from a local drug store (it is a heart medication that is now off the shelves due to ATF concerns) and for the carbon I used Kingsford briquettes. Sulfur came from the home chemistry set and I found other sources after my initial experiments.
There are many ways to skin this boom-cat without requiring one to obtain substances that are heavily-restricted.
This stuff is highly dangerous. Don't blame me if you put somebodies' (or your own) eye out, or earn the nickname "Stumpy"!
There's just no possible way for any government to stop anyone from making something that goes "boom" by restricting or banning anything that *can* be made/combined to go "boom". It's an even more stupid and self-defeat
This whole mess was a combination of bad government and bad corporate governance, not just the lefties trying to undermine capitalism.
This as a whole is true. However, in the US, without the government interference that mandated the creation of so much toxic mortgage paper, there could not have been a collapse of such magnitude, given the vast majority of mortgage lenders' loan practices prior to the interference by government.
Once the government forced them to create so much risky paper, it would be only natural that they'd try to sell-off as much as they could to whomever they could get to buy it to mitigate their risks.
It just happened that they couldn't sell off enough to prevent themselves from cratering, but they *did* manage to convince enough foreign banks and financial institutions t buy enough to inflict heavy losses on them as well.
The government interference was essential to creating such a disaster. Without it there might have been a temporary downturn in the mortgage finance market, but nothing approaching the size and severity we've experienced.
To think that these same people in government...like Barney Frank & Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the greedy, short-sighted, power-hungry incompetents in Congress...could end up running US health care is frightening to ponder.
Just out of interest which government legislation forced banks throughout the world to bundle crappy mortgages up with good ones and sell them on?
As I understand it, US banks & mortgage lenders along with Freddie & Fannie bundled these "toxic" mortgages into debt-instruments that they then sold & traded. Many financial institutions in other countries got caught holding some of that debt, as well as holding other US debt-instruments whose value collapsed when the US banks & mortgage lenders got in trouble from all the bad mortgage paper they still held.
The economy is global. When the US financial market suffers, so do other countries' financial markets. Just as when the financial markets in, for example, Hong Kong or the UK suffer, so does the US financial market, among others.
Seriously? Fucking insightful? I hate seeing this same meme bandied about.
There were multiple actions by the government that worked together with a firm belief that housing prices would continue to rise to cause this situation. Deregulation by one party. Broadening lending standards by another. Bankers who found ways to make money that while not illegal, required a firm willful ignorance of potential future calamity.
No one group is responsible for this, and to try and claim otherwise shows a complete misunderstanding of the situation.
You are correct that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are solely responsible, and nowhere did I claim or imply that. Both parties are at fault. The fault is with corrupt politicians seeking to increase their own wealth & power, and attempting to use the public's money to buy votes. I believe there are also other forces at work using these failings of both sides to advance their own agenda to "fundamentally change America", to quote Obama.
I'm very scared of precisely *what* that "change" that these forces seek will mean to our Republic and our Freedom.
[snip]...closeminded traditionalists without understanding of relevant issues keep their mouths shut when those issues are being discussed.
So...who decides who is "progressive" and who is "traditionalist"? Why is being "traditional" an automatic disqualifier? Why is being "progressive" an automatic qualifier? Why is it fair...if we are truly all equal...to deny some with opinions and views we don't like a voice? What if the tides of popular opinion turn and suddenly *you* are the one having his voice in matters of your own governance silenced?
At any rate, the Constitution is dead. We have lost the ability to amend the Constitution, so the only choice we can make is to ignore it when it doesn't suit us. I would prefer the Constitution to be a living document, and that we could thereby continue to use it... but the fact of the matter is that the Constitution as a whole hasn't been relevant for decades. The world is simply far too different from what it was 70 years ago, let alone 220 years ago, for the unchanging Constitution to be considered anything more than a guideline to running this nation.
So... I'll agree with you, that we need to get back to the Constitution... provided that we can change the Constitution,..[snip]
The US Constitution was *intended by design* to be difficult to change, needing overwhelming support of the Citizens, the States, and the Congress to effect any change. They *intended* that the Constitution not be a "living document"; that it not be subject to passing populist whims or the designs of a political party temporarily in power.
Things like the Second Amendment that many "progressives" view as harmful were *meant* to be hard to change, *precisely because* there were people with those same "progressive" beliefs back then. They were discounted because the authors of the Constitution understood history and viewed any problems with individuals having guns as minor compared to the danger to the Republic from a government ruling over an unarmed, thus unable-to-resist-with-force, helpless citizenry when that government became too corrupt and over-reaching.
The "re-interpretation" of parts of the Constitution engaged in by the Supreme Court and the government is a travesty, and threatens our Republic with the downfall of Freedom in the USA. If a change or addition is that good a thing and thus has wide support, then there should be no problem with passing an Amendment as the founders intended and designed for in the Constitution.
If a Constitutional Amendment cannot be passed, then there is not enough support for it and it should *not* be effectively enacted, or a current Amendment effectively neutered, by shenanigans of the SCOTUS or Congress, thereby bypassing the rights guaranteed & set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution and the will of the People and the States.
"By the same logic you can't blame the bankers who ruined the world economy"
You can't blame them, but for a different reason. The seeds of the devastation were planted in 1999 [nytimes.com], when the congressional Democrats forced Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac to lower their lending standards -- suddenly, millions of people, who hitherto would not qualify for mortgage, were able to obtain one. The same supply of the real estate now faced a spiked demand, which in our highly efficient capitalist economy resulted in spike of both prices and building activity to meet the demand.
Unfortunately, helping the poor qualify for mortgage does not help them pay it off. That the Democrats were able to blame Republicans [ldsmag.com] (whose only fault was in not fighting against it hard enough) for this is a spectacular feat of mind-manipulation...
What about the much-maligned easing of banking regulations? Nope, that's not, what caused the problem -- even if it exacerbated it. Would you blame a powerful engine for an accident, when the car slams into a log lying across the highway? Sure, if it weren't running at high speed, the driver could've stopped safely without hitting the obstruction. But the blame is solidly on those, who placed the log across the road, not on the car-maker, that gave you the speedy vehicle...
I just wanted to say, excellent summary & analogy...and spot-on, even if it's off-topic for the discussion. I remember screaming at the TV back in 1999 when this was put in place; "Why are you putting poor people who can't freaking afford a house onto a near-certain path to default & bankruptcy!?!?".
This was so easy to see coming that it makes you start to take Glenn Beck & his theories on a planned collapse and reformation of the US as a socialist/fascist regime seriously, and I don't *want* to.
Mark Loyd, Obama-appointed "Diversity" Czar at the FCC thinks Chavez' media polices are necessary & essential. There's video of Loyd discussing Chavez and his control of Venezuelan media. Look for the hammer to drop on free speech in US media, particularly talk radio and political-opinion shows.
I'm not a denier. It's probable that man is having some sort of impact on the climate. How much of one I'm not smart enough to say but you can't say with creditability that the sheer scale of human civilization isn't having some sort of impact.
Agreed, same here.
That said, what do you do about it?
That, as you point out, is the rub. Without sufficient reliable & verifiable information as to what extent and at what rate our civilization and its' energy production & consumption is affecting the planets' climate, there can be no reasoned plan of action.
We'll either at the one end cause unnecessary suffering & death by unneeded restrictions or even worsen some factor of which we are unaware, or on the other hand not do enough to make any meaningful difference.
Additionally, if it's found that civilization would need to revert to, as you say, a hunter-gatherer lifestyle to prevent global warming/climate change, then we'd better find another solution because that ain't gonna happen.
As you also point out, people won't tolerate and will remove any government that attempts to reduce standards of living...unless, of course, that government somehow is able to gain full authoritarian-dictatorship control (of the entire planet, if it's to be effective) where people have no rights or any say in any aspect of their lives.
That scares me much more than any spectre of climate change.
"That said, it makes complete sense to get the CO2 emissions under control"
How do you purpose to do that without forcing China and India to halt their development at gunpoint? If global warming is primarily man made then we are already fucked. The West could cut our standard of living to a stone age level and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference in the end.
About the only technology that could make a meaningful difference in the end is nuclear and we've largely abandoned it because of a vocal minority of people scared by anything with the word "nuclear" in the title. The renewables that are currently in production don't scale well and will never be able to displace coal and nuclear for the base load.
Bravo! Well said!
A very pragmatic and well-reasoned post. It's quite likely you'll get modded down to oblivion, but regardless, excellent points.
Just too add to this, a recent Slashdot article here suggests that we may actually be headed for another "Little Ice Age".
Additionally, as much as the proponents of global warming/carbon-credit trading|taxation are fond of pointing to the greed of their opponents, many of their major-movers stand to make obscene profits if the policies they support come to pass.
What is lacking is pragmatism and a sense of proportion and reasonableness.
Alas, our posts will in all likelyhood be buried among all the "Denier!!" and "Enviro-Nut!!" screaming.
I was thinking of how this SCO legal fiasco resembled a Monty Python skit also, but I had the "Dead Parrot" skit in mind. Hopefully, it will work out in real life that SCO/McBride plays the part of the parrot where John Cleese raps it solidly against the counter, saying;
"This parrot is NO MORE! it has CEASED TO BE! It has expired and gone to meet its' maker! This is a LATE PARROT!!!":D
According to TFA, the spammer offered three times (at judgment, at collection, and after seizure) to drop the judgment or return the possessions if the anti-spammer would drop his appeal.
If I understand the law correctly, by doing so the spammer committed extortion.
IANAL. Could somebody who IAL comment please?
IANAL
However, as I understand it, that general type of situation being legally considered "extortion" typically only applies if the "extort-er" is some normal everyday person or small business, and the "extort-ee" is a major political campaign contributor or otherwise is, or is connected to, those with financial and/or political power.
Why the hell are informative/insightful comments being modded flamebait today? Parent's post is informative in response to the GP. You might not agree with his last paragraph but that doesn't make the whole post irrelevant.
It's NOT *just* the last paragraph that offends the SlashKOS crowd. It's the outing of misinformation being used against individual gun ownership, and on top of that, specifically outing misinformation being spread by Obama.
That's always been the modis operandi of the liberal-left: being unable to compete in an open debate on the facts and the outcomes of their ideas, they seek to silence opposition. Just look at the healthcare town meetings.
When organized, bussed-in protesters were out screaming about GWB and his policies (which I disagreed with also, as the R's are not truly conservative) or any number of other liberal causes, that was patriotic and simply free speech. The town meeting protesters and the Tea Party protesters are labeled as everything from Nazis & white supremacists to gun-crazy extremists, racist rednecks, and astroturfers paid by health insurance companies. Never mind that SEIU thugs physically attacked an African-American outside one of the town hall meetings.
The liberal-left had best be careful. It's waking a sleeping giant in the form of the normally-silent vast majority of US citizens that normally pay politics no mind, and these people are pissed that they're finding themselves having to put their normal lives on hold and being forced to act to preserve the country they love.
I came across this video that I found quite powerful & moving, and describes that vast normally-silent majority of people in the US when they realize their freedoms & way of life are being threatened.
Why the hell are informative/insightful comments being modded flamebait today? Parent's post is informative in response to the GP. You might not agree with his last paragraph but that doesn't make the whole post irrelevant.
It's NOT *just* the last paragraph that offends the SlashKOS crowd. It's the outing of misinformation being used against individual gun ownership, and on top of that, specifically outing misinformation being spread by Obama.
That's always been the modis operandi of the liberal-left: being unable to compete in an open debate on the facts and the outcomes of their ideas, they seek to silence opposition. Just look at the healthcare town meetings.
When organized, bussed-in protesters were out screaming about GWB and his policies (which I disagreed with also, as the R's are not truly conservative) or any number of other liberal causes, that was patriotic and simply free speech. The town meeting protesters and the Tea Party protesters are labeled as everything from Nazis & white supremacists to gun-crazy extremists, racist rednecks, and astroturfers paid by health insurance companies. Never mind that SEIU thugs physically attacked an African-American outside one of the town hall meetings.
The liberal-left had best be careful. It's waking a sleeping giant in the form of the normally-silent vast majority of US citizens that normally pay politics no mind, and these people are pissed that they're finding themselves having to put their normal lives on hold and being forced to act to preserve the country they love.
I came across this video that I found quite powerful & moving, and describes that vast normally-silent majority of people in the US when they realize their freedoms & way of life are being threatened.
Unfortunately for him, the cartel has tremendous firepower (smuggled from the United States) and fought the army in the streets.
There are some guns brought in from the US like semi-automatic pistols, but the vast majority of the arms favored by the drug cartels like fully-automatic assault rifles, sub-machineguns, grenades, rocket-launchers, and heavy machineguns come from the Mexican military themselves and smuggled in from countries to the south of Mexico.
Obamas' statement on one of his recent trips to Mexico that a high percentage of the guns being used by the drug cartels originated in the US was debunked; that "fact" was a BATF statistic of the percentage of the serial numbers of weapons captured that were sent to the BATF by Mexican authorities for tracing. However, only those weapons already suspected to come from the US had their serial numbers reported to the BATF, which was a vanishingly-small percentage of the total weapons. This skewed the percentages reported by the BATF.
It's simply another intentionally-misleading statistic that's used to attempt to demonize private gun ownership in the US in the liberals' (no, they're not "progressives", they're *liberals*!) longtime and ongoing effort to ban individual gun ownership in the US.
Sorry for the formatting error. The post I quoted should have been entirely in italics and had the tags, and I swear I previewed it multiple times while writing it and before posting.:|
All wealth stems from theft either now or in earlier eras.
I see, so when I am the best at building widgets, and you buy one of my widgets because it is good quality and worth the price to you, this is theft?
Oh, I get it, I should *give* you the widget just because I have many and you have none. Even If I had to buy materials and spend time to make the widget, I am evil, mean and nasty to not just give you one.
Nonono!
You've got it all wrong! He didn't mean that at all!
[sarcasm] You shouldn't just be up and deciding to make some "widget" all on your own as an individual as if you were able to decide on your own actions without government involvement. You should be mandated by a government law, program, or regulation to make government approved and designed widgets for which you'll be allowed government-approved food, housing, and entertainment, and those widgets in turn will be given free to those who support the "correct" ideas and politicians!
Then, at the end of your government-mandated carefully-calculated standard productive years, you will be placed in a mandatory government-approved hospice facility to await your passing from whatever disease or illness that befalls you that you are no longer productive enough to the government to be worth wasting treatment on.
Where would the Great Society be if individuals could just decide to do what they wanted and what they each thought was best for them? They might make the wrong decisions! [/sarcasm]
I'll be careful not to challenge your obvious expertise in that area.
As to the rest of your comment, that's where the phrase "necessary evil" springs from. Yes, some government is necessary to maintain order, provide for national defense, etc. Usually even in these areas where it is clearly governments' purpose and reason to exist, it does only a mediocre job, and at that only at great cost.
No, my point stands. The only thing government does well is spend money and restrict freedom.
Wait, what number is that? I haven't IDd my computers. Maybe they mean MACs or something. But that only identifies a network interface and not a computer, let alone a user.
You're probably under the impression that you'll actually have a real chance to fight this in front of a jury. This will probably be handled by the ISP up till the point that they're fed up and ready to either bankrupt or jail you.
At that point you may get a trial, but what limitations on evidence will there be? If all the jury is allowed to hear is that you've already been caught red-handed by the ISP and sanctioned on multiple occasions, and you're prevented from bringing in more "evidence" to the contrary than what was presented to your ISP, (which made their decision in private with little or no notice as stated in most ISP TOS's so you actually didn't know you were in legal jeopardy to even think about *needing* any evidence or presenting it anywhere) then you're chances for a jury to find in your favor are slim.
If you think that couldn't happen just look at most versions of the infamous "three strikes laws" that have been pushed lately, thank goodness with limited success so far. Most of these have been proposed with no real recourse for the accused to fight them.
I swear, every day the West is getting more police-state and the East is becoming more free. Pity for those of us who may have to live through the time in the middle where there's no place to be relatively left alone by government either in the East OR the West.
you know what I love? opinions that make clearly verifiable claims, like, "The fed is inept, period. No matter which country you talk about" yet have no desire to actually verify that claim.
Wait, national government isn't generally inept!?
lolwut!?!?
I have to guess you sort of missed the last 3 thousand years of human history, particularly the last couple of hundred, and most especially the last 60-80? I'd say that's all the "verification" any rational being would need.
The *only* things government is actually *good* at are spending other peoples' money and restricting its' citizens' freedoms.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not even going to debate with you, as looking at your comment history, it's obvious you're a flaming liberal-progressive type. Accusing *me* of being a "wingnut"?? Hah! That's rich!
A majority of the US rejects the liberal-progressive agenda. That's why liberals seeking office have tried to re-brand themselves as "progressives" as that's a warmer, fuzzier label that doesn't recall the failure of nearly every liberal policy ever tried. Liberalism is a failed belief-set. It can never win in an open market and discussion of ideas. That's why liberals-progressives always seek to silence opposition and debate. It's the reason behind the Fairness Doctrine and new backdoor plans being pushed currently to accomplish the same thing.
It's also the reason that liberals have tried to send in their "brown-shirts" in the form of the unions and special-interest group bussed-in disruptors to the town-hall meetings. They hear the American people and it scares them to death, so they attempt what liberals always attempt when confronted with opposition...they try to silence it/drown it out.
White SEIU thugs even engaged in the assault and battery of an African-American outside of a town-hall meeting for his political beliefs! Where are the liberals with the charges of "racism", hmm? I guess it's ok when liberals and their friends do it, as long as the target had the "wrong" views. Nice multi-culturalism there.
Double-standard, much?
Liberalism always results in unintended consequences. Welfare expanded the number of poor. Right now, farmers in California are having their crops die to protect a bait-fish, which will increase food prices across the country thus causing poor people and their children to be less well-nourished. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are all broke and consuming the majority of this nations' GDP.
Liberalism is nothing more than a front for socialism/communism/fascism. It will never succeed in gaining and maintaining power in the US. The people of the US reject it and its' policies and ideology.
You can rail and scream and toss insults all you want. You can attempt to silence opposition all you want. Liberalism will never ever succeed in gaining and maintaining power in the US.
Just as the American people are rejecting this "Obamacare" reform and are about to storm Washington on 9/12 to reject the other liberal policies, they will always reject liberalism.
The American people have been asleep for a long time, but the liberal crazies in Washington have gone too far and have awakened the juggernaut. What has occurred so far in the town-halls and Tea Parties is only the beginning. People who have been too busy living their lives to pay attention have found it necessary to take action, and they're really, *really* pissed that the liberal nut-jobs have made it necessary for them to have to set things right.
Those politicians who fail to heed the will of the American people will find themselves in need of a new career come election time. This goes for those of both major parties. Republicans lost their conservative roots a long time ago and are now almost as liberal as the opposition. This was proven by GWB's lack of action on the borders & immigration, and the new entitlements and the bailouts.
Get ready for all your favorite liberal politicians to be sent packing on election day.
Now go away, before I taunt you with your failures again!
Oh...and have a nice day! :)
Strat
Moderated "Funny"??
Just...wow.
Well, that confirms it. If anyone needed any more proof that Slashdot moderators were hitting the crack pipe, that should have done it.
Put the pipe down and back away, before you hurt yourself.
Just say "no" to drugs. They're bad for you, mkay?
Strat
What we should really have is to get rid of the need for so much tax money to conduct the business of government.
People need to stop falling for politicians who bribe them with their own money.
Oh, if only that would happen! That is exactly spot-on.
But as long as we allow the government to seize so much wealth, politicians will continue to use this method to increase the governments' power, and citizens will fall for it if for no other reason than in desperation to try to get enough of their wealth back from the government that seized it to begin with to survive.
It's gotten so bad, the federal government doesn't even pretend that they don't do this intentionally to expand their power. Just look at how the federal government uses the threat of cutting off states from needed returns of tax money the feds have seized from the states to exert control over the states in matters that the Constitution says are to be decided by each state and the people therein.
There needs to be a revolt that throws out every incumbent politician until they finally get the message that we refuse to elect anyone that does not seek to drastically reduce the wealth the government seizes, by threat of force, from its' own citizens and begins to interpret & uphold the Constitution at face value again.
I have an awful feeling that it would take going quite far down the "four boxes in defense of Liberty", though. Then again, the way things are going, it will come to that anyway if the people truly tried to throw out the scoundrels. I'm pretty certain that if the government believed that the people were truly intent on seriously reducing its' power, there would be some sort of "emergency" declared, with marshal law and suspended elections.
It's a horrifying and likely very bloody prospect. However, waiting will just make the cost higher.
Strat
"It's the culmination of the Reaganomics era, where everyone "learned" that the almighty dollar was the only thing that mattered, and you get your bonuses based on quarterly performance, not on long-term performance."
Sure. Because before bad old Reagan entered the office, everybody only got bonuses after 10 SOLID YEARS of performance... and dollars didn't matter so nobody cared. No, the economic miracle of the United States, which began over a hundred years before Reagan was a gleam in his father's eye somehow managed to make it all the way to 1980 before people began thinking that dollars are "almighty" and that bonuses should be made in accordance with recent activity.
Yep. Makes sense me! (Even if it doesn't)
-Ben
Ben old horse, what you need to realize is that many people who tend to have a more "left" political belief-set tend to suffer from RDS (Reagan Derangement Syndrome), usually as a lesser symptom in conjunction with BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome). These poor people are incapable of rational thought whenever Bush, or to a lesser extent (now), Reagan, enter into the conversation.
It's curious to note however, although Carter had all but destroyed this country from both a national defense/foreign policy standpoint as well as an economic standpoint, you never heard Reagan blaming his/the nations' problems on Carter, especially after the first 3-4months in office. He was more about encouraging the nation and the people to look to the future, not seeking to blame the past. This stands in stark contrast to Clinton & Obama.
Just don't expect anyone with leftist political views to be willing or capable of discussing either Reagan or GWB rationally.
Now, as to this proposed redefining by the FCC of the term "broadband", it's an obvious underhanded move by the telcos/ISPs to rake in more money for lesser service and should be nipped in the bud. If anything, the standards should be greatly increased as technology has advanced along with the other nations of the world and the needs of the nation and the citizens has increased to match.
If the US is to have a hope of remaining competitive in this new "Information Economy" that recent administrations...both (R) and (D)...have been so enthusiastic for, then the US *must* have a competitive network infrastructure.
Personally, I think it's a major mistake for the US to abandon nearly all its' manufacturing base. Look to China, Russia, and India to be the new superpowers on the world stage in the next few decades if this trend continues, with the US relegated to Second-World Nation status, much as India has enjoyed the last 50 years.
If the US is going to switch to this "Information Economy" model and abandon manufacturing, then it had better get its' network infrastructure in shape to compete and not seek to "dumb-down" our network infrastructure, as other countries are far, far ahead.
Strat
High proof rubbing or cleaning alcohol sold in American drug stores won't work because there is a deliberate retardant added to spoil its value as an explosive. Perhaps a good thing, but if you need to make one of these weapons you should use some old fashioned moonshine or something home-made.
Easy solution: "Klean-Strip S-L-X Denatured Alcohol" widely available at home improvement and paint supply stores in pints and gallons. I use it as a shellac thinner when finishing the tweed covering on vintage-style guitar amplifiers I build.
As for black powder, I used to make the stuff based on a recipe from the World Book Encyclopedia. The Salt Pieter I purchased from a local drug store (it is a heart medication that is now off the shelves due to ATF concerns) and for the carbon I used Kingsford briquettes. Sulfur came from the home chemistry set and I found other sources after my initial experiments.
There are many ways to skin this boom-cat without requiring one to obtain substances that are heavily-restricted.
"Explosives and Propellants from Commonly Available Materials": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/Common_Materials.pdf
"CIA Field Expedient Methods for Explosives Preparations": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/CIA_FEMFEP.pdf
"Composite Rocket Fuels": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/Composite_Rocket_Fuels.pdf
"Deadly Brew-Advanced Improvised Explosives": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/Deadly_Brew.zip
"Guide to Homemade Detonators": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/Ragnars_Detonators.pdf
"Home and Recreational Use of High Explosives and Homemade C-4": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/HARUOHE.zip
"Home Workshop Explosives": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/Home_Workshop_Explosives.zip
"Improvised Explosives: How to Make Your Own": http://thedisease.net/functions.php?PHPSESSID=04dba15555551856435582268479ee3c&arcanum=explosives/Improvised_Explosives_Lecker.zip
Much more here: http://thedisease.net/?ejaculate=library&your_poison=Explosives
This stuff is highly dangerous. Don't blame me if you put somebodies' (or your own) eye out, or earn the nickname "Stumpy"!
There's just no possible way for any government to stop anyone from making something that goes "boom" by restricting or banning anything that *can* be made/combined to go "boom". It's an even more stupid and self-defeat
This whole mess was a combination of bad government and bad corporate governance, not just the lefties trying to undermine capitalism.
This as a whole is true. However, in the US, without the government interference that mandated the creation of so much toxic mortgage paper, there could not have been a collapse of such magnitude, given the vast majority of mortgage lenders' loan practices prior to the interference by government.
Once the government forced them to create so much risky paper, it would be only natural that they'd try to sell-off as much as they could to whomever they could get to buy it to mitigate their risks.
It just happened that they couldn't sell off enough to prevent themselves from cratering, but they *did* manage to convince enough foreign banks and financial institutions t buy enough to inflict heavy losses on them as well.
The government interference was essential to creating such a disaster. Without it there might have been a temporary downturn in the mortgage finance market, but nothing approaching the size and severity we've experienced.
To think that these same people in government...like Barney Frank & Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the greedy, short-sighted, power-hungry incompetents in Congress...could end up running US health care is frightening to ponder.
Strat
Just out of interest which government legislation forced banks throughout the world to bundle crappy mortgages up with good ones and sell them on?
As I understand it, US banks & mortgage lenders along with Freddie & Fannie bundled these "toxic" mortgages into debt-instruments that they then sold & traded. Many financial institutions in other countries got caught holding some of that debt, as well as holding other US debt-instruments whose value collapsed when the US banks & mortgage lenders got in trouble from all the bad mortgage paper they still held.
The economy is global. When the US financial market suffers, so do other countries' financial markets. Just as when the financial markets in, for example, Hong Kong or the UK suffer, so does the US financial market, among others.
Strat
Seriously? Fucking insightful? I hate seeing this same meme bandied about.
There were multiple actions by the government that worked together with a firm belief that housing prices would continue to rise to cause this situation. Deregulation by one party. Broadening lending standards by another. Bankers who found ways to make money that while not illegal, required a firm willful ignorance of potential future calamity.
No one group is responsible for this, and to try and claim otherwise shows a complete misunderstanding of the situation.
You are correct that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are solely responsible, and nowhere did I claim or imply that. Both parties are at fault. The fault is with corrupt politicians seeking to increase their own wealth & power, and attempting to use the public's money to buy votes. I believe there are also other forces at work using these failings of both sides to advance their own agenda to "fundamentally change America", to quote Obama.
I'm very scared of precisely *what* that "change" that these forces seek will mean to our Republic and our Freedom.
Strat
[snip]...closeminded traditionalists without understanding of relevant issues keep their mouths shut when those issues are being discussed.
So...who decides who is "progressive" and who is "traditionalist"? Why is being "traditional" an automatic disqualifier? Why is being "progressive" an automatic qualifier? Why is it fair...if we are truly all equal...to deny some with opinions and views we don't like a voice? What if the tides of popular opinion turn and suddenly *you* are the one having his voice in matters of your own governance silenced?
At any rate, the Constitution is dead. We have lost the ability to amend the Constitution, so the only choice we can make is to ignore it when it doesn't suit us. I would prefer the Constitution to be a living document, and that we could thereby continue to use it... but the fact of the matter is that the Constitution as a whole hasn't been relevant for decades. The world is simply far too different from what it was 70 years ago, let alone 220 years ago, for the unchanging Constitution to be considered anything more than a guideline to running this nation.
So... I'll agree with you, that we need to get back to the Constitution... provided that we can change the Constitution,..[snip]
The US Constitution was *intended by design* to be difficult to change, needing overwhelming support of the Citizens, the States, and the Congress to effect any change. They *intended* that the Constitution not be a "living document"; that it not be subject to passing populist whims or the designs of a political party temporarily in power.
Things like the Second Amendment that many "progressives" view as harmful were *meant* to be hard to change, *precisely because* there were people with those same "progressive" beliefs back then. They were discounted because the authors of the Constitution understood history and viewed any problems with individuals having guns as minor compared to the danger to the Republic from a government ruling over an unarmed, thus unable-to-resist-with-force, helpless citizenry when that government became too corrupt and over-reaching.
The "re-interpretation" of parts of the Constitution engaged in by the Supreme Court and the government is a travesty, and threatens our Republic with the downfall of Freedom in the USA. If a change or addition is that good a thing and thus has wide support, then there should be no problem with passing an Amendment as the founders intended and designed for in the Constitution.
If a Constitutional Amendment cannot be passed, then there is not enough support for it and it should *not* be effectively enacted, or a current Amendment effectively neutered, by shenanigans of the SCOTUS or Congress, thereby bypassing the rights guaranteed & set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution and the will of the People and the States.
Strat
"By the same logic you can't blame the bankers who ruined the world economy"
You can't blame them, but for a different reason. The seeds of the devastation were planted in 1999 [nytimes.com], when the congressional Democrats forced Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac to lower their lending standards -- suddenly, millions of people, who hitherto would not qualify for mortgage, were able to obtain one. The same supply of the real estate now faced a spiked demand, which in our highly efficient capitalist economy resulted in spike of both prices and building activity to meet the demand.
Unfortunately, helping the poor qualify for mortgage does not help them pay it off. That the Democrats were able to blame Republicans [ldsmag.com] (whose only fault was in not fighting against it hard enough) for this is a spectacular feat of mind-manipulation...
What about the much-maligned easing of banking regulations? Nope, that's not, what caused the problem -- even if it exacerbated it. Would you blame a powerful engine for an accident, when the car slams into a log lying across the highway? Sure, if it weren't running at high speed, the driver could've stopped safely without hitting the obstruction. But the blame is solidly on those, who placed the log across the road, not on the car-maker, that gave you the speedy vehicle...
I just wanted to say, excellent summary & analogy...and spot-on, even if it's off-topic for the discussion. I remember screaming at the TV back in 1999 when this was put in place; "Why are you putting poor people who can't freaking afford a house onto a near-certain path to default & bankruptcy!?!?".
This was so easy to see coming that it makes you start to take Glenn Beck & his theories on a planned collapse and reformation of the US as a socialist/fascist regime seriously, and I don't *want* to.
Strat
Oops, I misspelled Czar Lloyd's name. Wouldn't want to disrespect a mans' name that has such respect for free and open speech.
Mark Loyd, Obama-appointed "Diversity" Czar at the FCC thinks Chavez' media polices are necessary & essential. There's video of Loyd discussing Chavez and his control of Venezuelan media. Look for the hammer to drop on free speech in US media, particularly talk radio and political-opinion shows.
You've been warned.
Strat
I'm not a denier. It's probable that man is having some sort of impact on the climate. How much of one I'm not smart enough to say but you can't say with creditability that the sheer scale of human civilization isn't having some sort of impact.
Agreed, same here.
That said, what do you do about it?
That, as you point out, is the rub. Without sufficient reliable & verifiable information as to what extent and at what rate our civilization and its' energy production & consumption is affecting the planets' climate, there can be no reasoned plan of action.
We'll either at the one end cause unnecessary suffering & death by unneeded restrictions or even worsen some factor of which we are unaware, or on the other hand not do enough to make any meaningful difference.
Additionally, if it's found that civilization would need to revert to, as you say, a hunter-gatherer lifestyle to prevent global warming/climate change, then we'd better find another solution because that ain't gonna happen.
As you also point out, people won't tolerate and will remove any government that attempts to reduce standards of living...unless, of course, that government somehow is able to gain full authoritarian-dictatorship control (of the entire planet, if it's to be effective) where people have no rights or any say in any aspect of their lives.
That scares me much more than any spectre of climate change.
Strat
Is there an easy way to quit using the government?
In Soviet Russia...
?
Ah, never mind!
"That said, it makes complete sense to get the CO2 emissions under control"
How do you purpose to do that without forcing China and India to halt their development at gunpoint? If global warming is primarily man made then we are already fucked. The West could cut our standard of living to a stone age level and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference in the end.
About the only technology that could make a meaningful difference in the end is nuclear and we've largely abandoned it because of a vocal minority of people scared by anything with the word "nuclear" in the title. The renewables that are currently in production don't scale well and will never be able to displace coal and nuclear for the base load.
Bravo! Well said!
A very pragmatic and well-reasoned post. It's quite likely you'll get modded down to oblivion, but regardless, excellent points.
Just too add to this, a recent Slashdot article here suggests that we may actually be headed for another "Little Ice Age".
Additionally, as much as the proponents of global warming/carbon-credit trading|taxation are fond of pointing to the greed of their opponents, many of their major-movers stand to make obscene profits if the policies they support come to pass.
What is lacking is pragmatism and a sense of proportion and reasonableness.
Alas, our posts will in all likelyhood be buried among all the "Denier!!" and "Enviro-Nut!!" screaming.
Strat
I was thinking of how this SCO legal fiasco resembled a Monty Python skit also, but I had the "Dead Parrot" skit in mind. Hopefully, it will work out in real life that SCO/McBride plays the part of the parrot where John Cleese raps it solidly against the counter, saying;
"This parrot is NO MORE! it has CEASED TO BE! It has expired and gone to meet its' maker! This is a LATE PARROT!!!" :D
Strat
According to TFA, the spammer offered three times (at judgment, at collection, and after seizure) to drop the judgment or return the possessions if the anti-spammer would drop his appeal.
If I understand the law correctly, by doing so the spammer committed extortion.
IANAL. Could somebody who IAL comment please?
IANAL
However, as I understand it, that general type of situation being legally considered "extortion" typically only applies if the "extort-er" is some normal everyday person or small business, and the "extort-ee" is a major political campaign contributor or otherwise is, or is connected to, those with financial and/or political power.
HTH HAND
Strat
Why the hell are informative/insightful comments being modded flamebait today? Parent's post is informative in response to the GP. You might not agree with his last paragraph but that doesn't make the whole post irrelevant.
It's NOT *just* the last paragraph that offends the SlashKOS crowd. It's the outing of misinformation being used against individual gun ownership, and on top of that, specifically outing misinformation being spread by Obama.
That's always been the modis operandi of the liberal-left: being unable to compete in an open debate on the facts and the outcomes of their ideas, they seek to silence opposition. Just look at the healthcare town meetings.
When organized, bussed-in protesters were out screaming about GWB and his policies (which I disagreed with also, as the R's are not truly conservative) or any number of other liberal causes, that was patriotic and simply free speech. The town meeting protesters and the Tea Party protesters are labeled as everything from Nazis & white supremacists to gun-crazy extremists, racist rednecks, and astroturfers paid by health insurance companies. Never mind that SEIU thugs physically attacked an African-American outside one of the town hall meetings.
The liberal-left had best be careful. It's waking a sleeping giant in the form of the normally-silent vast majority of US citizens that normally pay politics no mind, and these people are pissed that they're finding themselves having to put their normal lives on hold and being forced to act to preserve the country they love.
I came across this video that I found quite powerful & moving, and describes that vast normally-silent majority of people in the US when they realize their freedoms & way of life are being threatened.
http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/15523565/1322781786/name/TeaPartyCommercial.wmv [yimg.com]
Strat
"Flamebait"
Thanks for proving my point. :)
Strat
Why the hell are informative/insightful comments being modded flamebait today? Parent's post is informative in response to the GP. You might not agree with his last paragraph but that doesn't make the whole post irrelevant.
It's NOT *just* the last paragraph that offends the SlashKOS crowd. It's the outing of misinformation being used against individual gun ownership, and on top of that, specifically outing misinformation being spread by Obama.
That's always been the modis operandi of the liberal-left: being unable to compete in an open debate on the facts and the outcomes of their ideas, they seek to silence opposition. Just look at the healthcare town meetings.
When organized, bussed-in protesters were out screaming about GWB and his policies (which I disagreed with also, as the R's are not truly conservative) or any number of other liberal causes, that was patriotic and simply free speech. The town meeting protesters and the Tea Party protesters are labeled as everything from Nazis & white supremacists to gun-crazy extremists, racist rednecks, and astroturfers paid by health insurance companies. Never mind that SEIU thugs physically attacked an African-American outside one of the town hall meetings.
The liberal-left had best be careful. It's waking a sleeping giant in the form of the normally-silent vast majority of US citizens that normally pay politics no mind, and these people are pissed that they're finding themselves having to put their normal lives on hold and being forced to act to preserve the country they love.
I came across this video that I found quite powerful & moving, and describes that vast normally-silent majority of people in the US when they realize their freedoms & way of life are being threatened.
http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/15523565/1322781786/name/TeaPartyCommercial.wmv
Strat
Unfortunately for him, the cartel has tremendous firepower (smuggled from the United States) and fought the army in the streets.
There are some guns brought in from the US like semi-automatic pistols, but the vast majority of the arms favored by the drug cartels like fully-automatic assault rifles, sub-machineguns, grenades, rocket-launchers, and heavy machineguns come from the Mexican military themselves and smuggled in from countries to the south of Mexico.
Obamas' statement on one of his recent trips to Mexico that a high percentage of the guns being used by the drug cartels originated in the US was debunked; that "fact" was a BATF statistic of the percentage of the serial numbers of weapons captured that were sent to the BATF by Mexican authorities for tracing. However, only those weapons already suspected to come from the US had their serial numbers reported to the BATF, which was a vanishingly-small percentage of the total weapons. This skewed the percentages reported by the BATF.
It's simply another intentionally-misleading statistic that's used to attempt to demonize private gun ownership in the US in the liberals' (no, they're not "progressives", they're *liberals*!) longtime and ongoing effort to ban individual gun ownership in the US.
Strat
Ack!
Sorry for the formatting error. The post I quoted should have been entirely in italics and had the tags, and I swear I previewed it multiple times while writing it and before posting. :|
All wealth stems from theft either now or in earlier eras.
I see, so when I am the best at building widgets, and you buy one of my widgets because
it is good quality and worth the price to you, this is theft?
Oh, I get it, I should *give* you the widget just because I have many and you have none. Even If I had
to buy materials and spend time to make the widget, I am evil, mean and nasty to not just give you one.
Nonono!
You've got it all wrong! He didn't mean that at all!
[sarcasm]
You shouldn't just be up and deciding to make some "widget" all on your own as an individual as if you were able to decide on your own actions without government involvement. You should be mandated by a government law, program, or regulation to make government approved and designed widgets for which you'll be allowed government-approved food, housing, and entertainment, and those widgets in turn will be given free to those who support the "correct" ideas and politicians!
Then, at the end of your government-mandated carefully-calculated standard productive years, you will be placed in a mandatory government-approved hospice facility to await your passing from whatever disease or illness that befalls you that you are no longer productive enough to the government to be worth wasting treatment on.
Where would the Great Society be if individuals could just decide to do what they wanted and what they each thought was best for them? They might make the wrong decisions!
[/sarcasm]
Strat
Don't be a twat.
I'll be careful not to challenge your obvious expertise in that area.
As to the rest of your comment, that's where the phrase "necessary evil" springs from. Yes, some government is necessary to maintain order, provide for national defense, etc. Usually even in these areas where it is clearly governments' purpose and reason to exist, it does only a mediocre job, and at that only at great cost.
No, my point stands. The only thing government does well is spend money and restrict freedom.
Strat
Wait, what number is that? I haven't IDd my computers. Maybe they mean MACs or something. But that only identifies a network interface and not a computer, let alone a user.
You're probably under the impression that you'll actually have a real chance to fight this in front of a jury. This will probably be handled by the ISP up till the point that they're fed up and ready to either bankrupt or jail you.
At that point you may get a trial, but what limitations on evidence will there be? If all the jury is allowed to hear is that you've already been caught red-handed by the ISP and sanctioned on multiple occasions, and you're prevented from bringing in more "evidence" to the contrary than what was presented to your ISP, (which made their decision in private with little or no notice as stated in most ISP TOS's so you actually didn't know you were in legal jeopardy to even think about *needing* any evidence or presenting it anywhere) then you're chances for a jury to find in your favor are slim.
If you think that couldn't happen just look at most versions of the infamous "three strikes laws" that have been pushed lately, thank goodness with limited success so far. Most of these have been proposed with no real recourse for the accused to fight them.
I swear, every day the West is getting more police-state and the East is becoming more free. Pity for those of us who may have to live through the time in the middle where there's no place to be relatively left alone by government either in the East OR the West.
Strat
you know what I love? opinions that make clearly verifiable claims, like, "The fed is inept, period. No matter which country you talk about" yet have no desire to actually verify that claim.
Wait, national government isn't generally inept!?
lolwut!?!?
I have to guess you sort of missed the last 3 thousand years of human history, particularly the last couple of hundred, and most especially the last 60-80? I'd say that's all the "verification" any rational being would need.
The *only* things government is actually *good* at are spending other peoples' money and restricting its' citizens' freedoms.
Strat